• 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 #64 - Post-Release Plans

16_9.jpg

Hello and welcome to the first of many post-release Victoria 3 dev diaries! The game may now be out at last (weird, isn’t it?) but for us that just means a different phase of work has begun, the work of post-release support. We’ve been quite busy collecting feedback, fixing bugs and making balance changes, and are now working on the free patches that will be following the release, the first of which is a hotfix that should already be with you at the time you read this.

Our plans are naturally not limited to just hotfixes though, and so the topic of this dev diary is to outline what you can expect us to be focusing on in the first few larger free patches. We will not be focusing on our long-term ambitions for the game today; we certainly have no shortage of cool ideas for where we could take Victoria 3 in the years to come, but right now our focus is post-release support and patches, not expansion plans.

However, before I start, I want to share my own personal thoughts on the release. Overall, I consider the release a great success, and have been blown away by the sheer amount of people that have bought and are now playing Victoria 3. I’ve had a hand in this project since its earliest design inception, and have been Game Director of Victoria 3 since I left Stellaris in late 2018, and while it certainly hasn’t been the easiest game to work on at times, it is by far the most interesting and fulfilling project I’ve ever directed. The overarching vision of the game - a ‘society builder’ that puts internal development, economy and politics in the driving seat - may not have changed much since then, but the mechanics and systems have gone through innumerable iterations (a prominent internal joke in the team is ‘just one more Market Rework, please?’) to arrive where we are today, at what I consider to be a great game, one that lives up to our vision - but one that could do with improvement in a few key areas.

V3-PostLaunch-ForLoc.jpg


The first of these areas is military: The military system, being very different from the military systems of previous Grand Strategy Games, is one of those systems that has gone through a lot of iterations. While I believe that we have landed on a very solid core of how we want military gameplay in Victoria 3 to function and we have no intention of moving back towards a more tactical system, it is a system that suffers from some interface woes and which could do with selective deepening and increasing player control in specific areas. A few of the things we’re looking into improving and expanding on for the military system follow here, in no particular order:
  • Addressing some of the rough edges in how generals function at the moment, such as improving unit selection for battles and balancing the overall progression along fronts
  • Adding the ability for countries to set strategic objectives for their generals
  • Increasing the visibility of navies and making admirals easier to work with
  • Improving the ability of players to get an overview of their military situation and exposing more data, like the underlying numbers behind battle sizes
  • Finding solutions for the issue where theaters can split into multiple (sometimes even dozens) of tiny fronts as pockets are created
  • Experimenting with controlled front-splitting for longer fronts

The second area is historical immersion: While we have always been upfront with the fact that Victoria 3 is a historical sandbox rather than a strictly historical game, we still want players to feel as though the events unfolding forms a plausible alt-history, and right now there are some expected historical outcomes that are either not happening often enough, or happening in such a way that they become immersion-breaking. Again, in no particular order, some areas targeted for improvement in the short term:
  • Ensuring the American Civil War has a decent chance to happen, happens in a way that makes sense (slave states rising up to defend slavery, etc), and isn’t easily avoidable by the player.
  • Tweaking content such as the Meiji Restoration, Alaska purchase and so on in a way that they can more frequently be successfully performed by the AI, through a mix of AI improvements and content tweaks
  • Working to expose and improve content such as expeditions and journal entries that is currently too difficult for players to find or complete
  • Ensuring unifications such as Italy, Germany and Canada doesn’t constantly happen decades ahead of the historical schedule, and increasing the challenge of unifying Italy and Germany in particular
  • General AI tweaks to have AI countries play in a more believable, immersive way

We're balancing cultural/religious tolerance laws by having more restrictive laws increase the loyalty of accepted pops, so there is an actual trade-off involved.
DD64 01.png

The third area is diplomacy. While I think what we do have here is quite good and not in need of any significant redesign, this is an area that could do with even more deepening and there’s some options we want to add to diplomacy and diplomatic plays:
  • ‘Reverse-swaying’, that is the ability to offer to join a side in a play in exchange for something
  • The ability to expand your primary demands in a diplomatic play beyond just one wargoal (though this has to be done in such a way that there’s still a reason for countries to actually back down)
  • More things to offer in diplomatic plays, like giving away your own land
  • Trading (or at least giving away) states
  • Foreign investment and some form of construction in other countries, at least if they’re part of your market
  • Improving and expanding on interactions with and from subjects, such as being able to grant and ask for more autonomy through a diplomatic action

While those are the major areas targeted for improvement, there are other things that fall outside the scope of either warfare, historical immersion and diplomacy where we’ve also heard your feedback and want to make improvements, a few examples being:
  • Making it easier to get an overview of your Pops and Pop factors such as Needs, Standard of Living and Radicals/Loyalists
  • Experimenting with autonomous private-sector construction and increasing the differences in gameplay between different economic systems (though as I’ve said many times, we are never going to take construction entirely out of the hands of the player)
  • Ironing out some of the kinks with the late-game economy and the AI’s ability to develop key resources such as oil and rubber
  • Making it more interesting and ‘competitive’ but also more challenging to play in a more conservative and autocratic style

One of the first mechanics we're tweaking is Legitimacy, increasing its impact and making it so the share of votes in government matters far more, especially with more democratic laws.
DD64 02.png


The above is of course not even close to being an exhaustive list of everything we want to do, and I can’t promise that everything on the list is going to make it into the first few patches, or that our priorities won’t change as we continue to read and take in your feedback, only that as it stands these are our plans for the near future. I will also remind once again that everything mentioned above is something we want for our free post-release patches. At some point we will start talking about our plans for expansions, but that is definitely not anytime soon!

What I can promise you though, is that we’re going to strive to keep you informed and do our best to give you insight into the post-release development process with dev diaries, videos and streams, just like we did before the game was released. I’ll return next week as we start covering the details of the work we’re doing for our first post-release patch. See you then!
 

Attachments

  • V3-PostLaunch-ForLoc.jpg
    V3-PostLaunch-ForLoc.jpg
    4,7 MB · Views: 0
  • 372Like
  • 193Love
  • 33
  • 23
  • 19
  • 7Haha
Reactions:
The point of the argument is that HOI4 actually does have optional micro. You dont actually need to micro the armies to win the game, only to really over preform.
Setting aside that the HoI4 model only works for the late game, something that seemingly gets forgotten all the time in the same way people who loudly proclaimed that IG alliances would easily represent political parties...

What this effectively means is that the moment you are in any kind of marginal war, you can do micro, or you can lose. That's not a real choice. You've basically told players in many situations that they can either micro, or they can restart their game. It becomes a success tax. And when that tax detracts from the game, it's a bad thing to include.
 
  • 9
  • 6
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Is there any plan to add a system for westernizing nations like in vic2? The Qing is simply too overpowered in the current implementation. Being able to get loans, construct factories and research stuff like steam engines and somehow teleporting their entire armies to england with 4 ships in total seems...off.
 
  • 6Like
  • 4
Reactions:
It went unmentioned in your post Wizz but have you considered retooling how infrastructure works? I know you have other very large things to work on that probably take even greater precedence but once you notice the shortcomings of the current system it's kind of glaring, like Qing having full market access to their entire country at game start.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Is there any plans to add a system for westernizing nations like in vic2?
It's already in the game...it's called removing the landowners from power, reforming the laws, increasing research rate, and industrializing. The fact that there's no magic "you westernized" button doesn't mean you didn't westernize.
 
  • 10
  • 5
Reactions:
It's already in the game
Still, I find it highly unrealistic for the emperor Daoguang to summon his confucian bureaucrat in charge of construction at the start of the game and ask for 10 food industries and 20 universities to be built within the year, while issuing multiple millions of pounds worth of national debt.
 
  • 11
  • 2
Reactions:
It's already in the game...it's called removing the landowners from power, reforming the laws, increasing research rate, and industrializing. The fact that there's no magic "you westernized" button doesn't mean you didn't westernize.
I see this a lot in discussions about Vic3. People will say how there isn't something in the game, when what actually happened was they removed the single button press for it and instead made it a more involved, mechanic-centered process that better models the action to doing it.
 
  • 14
  • 8
Reactions:
Are there any plans to have some QoL fixes to the UI like telling the player how much the make off a country from tariffs or how much they’ll lose if they make a trade agreement or join/invite to a customs union?

Another area that should be looked at is AI logic in terms of attitude towards the player. It’s frustrating to send diplomats over to a nation that sees me as a threat due to simply having a larger military with seemingly no way to change that opinion or a puppet that is forever rebellious. I’m enjoying how the diplomatic system works but it can be difficult to get anything accomplished diplomatically as the AI takes certain stances rarely changes its attitude and often comes off as arbitrary. If I’m sending overtures to establish some sort of bilateral relationship, it shouldn’t be impossible for the AI to view me as a friend at some point.

Edit: Please add a music interface! I'd like to choose what songs I want to hear from time to time and the music will randomly stop playing in the late game.
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Still, I find it highly unrealistic for the emperor Daoguang to summon his confucian bureaucrat in charge of construction at the start of the game and ask for 10 food industries and 20 universities to be built within the year, while issuing multiple millions of pounds worth of national debt.
This is a valid criticism, and the way you've phrased your concerns here is much more investigatable and actionable than asking for Westernization mechanics.
 
  • 14
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Still, I find it highly unrealistic for the emperor Daoguang to summon his confucian bureaucrat in charge of construction at the start of the game and ask for 10 food industries and 20 universities to be built within the year, while issuing multiple millions of pounds worth of national debt.
That's because Qing are wildly more powerful than they ought to be at the moment thanks to some game mechanics that aren't fleshed out properly.

But the point stands: what do you think westernization actually means? When Japan westernized, what it actually did was pretty much what I described and what you have to do in order to compete as an eastern nation at game start. The fact that this process is way too easy for Qing right now doesn't mean that's not what westernization is.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
These are great, I think you're missing one important thing though, which is that right now diplomatic plays feel so arbitrarily high-stakes and unbounded in scope. It's way too easy for the annexation of a tiny state in africa to spiral into a world war in like 1845 for no clear reason. Great powers seem to randomly get involved to oppose you or support you even though they shouldn't realistically have a reason to care. Diplo system needs to 1. make it much clearer and more predictable who's likely to get involved and 2. probably needs some sort of scoping mechanic so that a war in africa is likely to only stay a war in africa, especially early in the period
 
  • 7
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Well, that's literally everything I thought "this'd improve the gameplay" and then some, so bravo. I'm already enjoying Vicky 3 a lot and look forward to enjoying it even more.

Shame on those that were sneering that problems would only be fixed in DLC, not that being wrong is likely to teach them anything.
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
some game mechanics that aren't fleshed out properly
Exactly. Perhaps the way I phrased it was misleading. I meant that it would be more appopriate to implement a system where features like researching and taking loans are inaccessible to the Qing unless certain conditions were met...
Westernizing should mean more than just swapping out certain interest groups out of your government and focus more on "enlightening" the common folk, preaching western ideas, nuture private enterprises, stuff that certain confucian bureaucrats did (or at least tried to do), like Zeng Guofan and Li Hongzhang's effort to westernize. Being able to take loans and active researching stuff like steam engines should only be available to industrialized nations.
 
  • 5
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Awesome roadmap! Looking forward to the revisions. Thanks for your hard work.
 
The post litteraly says multiple times your trying YOUR vision. Not ours. This is a sad state of affairs.
Also telling everyone that you COULD move back to a propper war system but wont is like slapping them in the face.

If you want a game made to YOUR vision, then make your own game.

I bought a game based on THIS vision and I like it just fine, thank you.

Also stop pretending everyone agrees with you.
 
  • 13Like
  • 10
  • 4
Reactions:
The post litteraly says multiple times your trying YOUR vision. Not ours. This is a sad state of affairs.
A game design that does not satisfy its designers cannot excel. It may or may not be fun (if it is fun, that is probably only a happy accident), but it cannot excel.
Also telling everyone that you COULD move back to a propper war system but wont is like slapping them in the face.
Since "getting what you want" is apparently not on the table, what would you prefer: the kind of mealy-mouthed marketing handwaves about "investigating future options" that prove Bill Hicks was right, or an honest statement of Paradox's intentions?
 
  • 12
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I just want to express my displeasure with the warfare system. I am glad you have acknowledged the issues, but I think you are making a big mistake by doubling down on this system. With all respect to the developers, I know you wanted to try something different and to focus on the economy, but this system is terrible and it ruins the game for me, and I assume others. I really wish I could refund at this point since it is obvious you will not compromise with the members of the community who want more from this aspect of the game.

It was completely obvious they weren't going to compromise this from the moment the war dev diaries came out. It continued to be obvious non-micro of military was never, ever going to change in the year since.

You have every right to be upset and not want the game if that was so important to you. But if you bought the game thinking they were going to give you army micro at some point, you were deluding yourself.
 
Last edited:
  • 12
  • 5
  • 3Like
Reactions: