• 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:
I wish those of us who want more *agency* in the warfare system wouldn't be accused of wanting to "micro" things all the time. There's a lot of conceptual space between the current rather extreme hands-off approach and reverting to EU4. It seems to have been forgotten that, in times of war, the ruling class - whether it be a King or a Commissar or whatever between - would indeed focus very strongly on the war.

It's not just the cosmetics, nor do I want a full-on HOI4-style system. What I want is units that don't teleport, that are assigned to a chain of command that can be given objectives. "Micro", in the terms of clicking on a unit and sending it to the next province, doesn't have to be in it - but more agency than "Attack on this front, and if it merges, then come home" *should* be in it.

If there was some simulation of the relative speed of communication in the game, that would help as well, such that orders, reports etc. should take TIME to get from and to the front, and it should scale with distance and comms method. Interfering (changes of orders or command) could come with appropriate changes in terms of morale and organisation. This would mean that a player had means of interacting with the war, beyond pressing one of three (really, just two) buttons.
 
  • 16
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Hello Everyone!!

This where the main issues in my first serious run as Austria:

- Incredible (and stupid) aggression from Prussia. They startet an average of two diplomatic plays per year, mostly loosing them and building up an incredible score of aggression. The US also behaved super imperialistic in Afrika.
- 'Hung wars': When Prussia was split by a rebellion, they managed to quickly requoncer the prussian provinces, but in the Rheinland there appeared a front on the western borders! Since Prussia had no access, no batlles happened and as both contries held their capital, there moral couldn't fall below zero => Endless war.
Even after I made Prussia my puppet, the senseless war continiued.
Also a rebellion in a minor saxon country created no fronts, altough they shared a common border => Endless war.
- Multiple fronts with the same name: Happened to me on celebes: All 3 fronts being named 'celebes front'. This makes it really hard to figure out where to send my armies.
- The problem of splitting fronts is already addressed.
- Every front that touched my borders being named 'souther tyrol - x front', altough none of the fronts where even near southern tyrol.

- Being able to define strategic goals would be really cool!

To keep the market somewhat balanced prooved really though, but I guess this will ease with experience.

- One problem I couldn't solve: How to keep pops from migrating? There was labor shortage in the provinces, good jobs beeing offerd and good pay, but Pops kept leaving the province.

- A special problem was Sinai province. I immediatly incorporated it, but couldn't get pops to move there. Ok, I can understand why nobody wants to work in an iron mine on sinai, and at first the harbor filled slowly, but steadily with pops. After building the suez channe howeverl the few pops there actually startet to move away! Even the ones employed in the harbor dropped fast.

- One strange thing that happend to me with laws: I had a popular movment to indrduce a law for social wellfare (38% support). I couldn't comply at that time, as it would have pushed the aristocrats to far into negative opinion. About one year after the dissolution of the movement things had improved enough for me to try to get the law implemented, but I foung I couldn't, 'cause there was 0 support for it. Sorry, but thats simply absolut unrealistic. I don't expect to get the same support but there should still be enough support to get the process startet.

- One really, really serious issue: When discontend started to spread, from the timing I guess a bloody war was the reason, I couldn't see what's the reason for the discontend. I see only the percentage of discontend pops, but not the reason behind it. Also in provinces that loose pops due to migration I didn't see what the problem was to start to correct it.

Best regards and thanks for the game!
 
- One problem I couldn't solve: How to keep pops from migrating? There was labor shortage in the provinces, good jobs beeing offerd and good pay, but Pops kept leaving the province.
Close the borders? Use the edict that increases immigration pull there? If you have open borders, and they have some better place to migrate to you might be not supposed to be able stop them
 
Glad, they will look at making Autocratic governments more viable, gimped my German game with those policies.

Multiculturalism & women in work, are no brainers ATM, very powerful and no drawbacks. Also elections have no drawback, does in even matter who wins it?

Vic2 was just as bad in this regard, I get it is a time of liberalism (Should remain better, but have some drawbacks). But I like multiple playstyles being viable like in Stellaris.
 
That's on General AI balance and trust me its in the feedback lists, we've got ideas and hope to get to it soon but as you will notice I'm not promising when because that one is likely 100% on me to fix when I get time and I've already got a fun backlog of things to tweak for you all.
One possible suggestion for an "easy fix", would be to create decisions that the player/AI can take when they colonized "ahistorical" lands like the ones mentioned, that would result in them being traded to the "rightful" owner in exchange for some money. That way you could avoid having to restrict the AI too much in where they conquer/colonize, and at the same time make historical outcomes more likely.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Is there any possibility of solving the single battle on a long single frontline problem by allowing for multiple battles on a frontline. I suggested this in an earlier thread about the war system but you could have a "zone of control" that determines how close or far each battle can be from each other. The zone of control would represent the effective frontage that troops are pulled into the battle or that troops are assigned as support units (not participating in the battle but also unable to join other battles).

On a short front, the zone of control would mean that behavior is unchanged. There would be one battle per short front. On a long front, you can have multiple battles taking place but because of the zone of control, they would never be right next to each other. This could allow for realistic front behavior without compromising the AI's battle abilities or increasing the complexity of tasks that the war AI needs to be able to handle.

I don't know if this is feasible from a programming or development point of view so I would be interested to hear any feedback on why this could not work well.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Would be nice to see some changes to goverment systems so constitutional monarchies are better represented with the "ruler" being the leader of the largest party and the Monarch being a figure head but still providing some bonuses. Maybe some system to show head of legislative and head of executive in the ruler area with balance of power (and balance of trait impacts) determined by laws.

Down the road it would be cool if government could be developed further so cabinet roles like finance, home affairs, foreign affairs could be assigned to unique characters and affected by traits.
 
Uh the top positive review says nothing.
Also Imperator went post release below 50% and recovered later. Victoria 3 will see the same development.

In the end, the only thing that matters is the player retention. If they can keep a stable playerbase post release above 10k... that is an excellent result.
For comparison, Imperator went below 1000, which made further development no longer viable.

Leaving a bad recommendation on Steam is actually scoring an own goal if you want the game continued to be developed. Bad reviews = less sales, less likely continued development.

So we shouldn't give feedback in the form of reviews incase they don't fix it because it had bad reviews? That's cope logic. Either they care enough about longstanding IP to fix this heap or they care too much about making more money on it.
 
  • 8
  • 2
Reactions:
Thanks for the advice.

But still it would be nice to see WHY the pops are moving.
It shows you that if you hover over migration pull in state window. Mainly pops migrate when they have no jobs, have low SOL, and other province with higher migration pull solves some of this. There's a migration map mode too
 
I love the game overall but performance starts to break down at around 1880ish. And it isn't just pop fragmentation because it keeps happening even when I entirely disable economic migration.
 
Will there be a system for starting the game in the upcoming DLC as a decentralized state that has completely different mechanics that need to be developed to become a real unrecognized power?
 
What I need is a map mode /lens that will highlight states with a given resource.
F.eg. if I need Oil I can highlight states with oil on the map and plan my expansion accordingly.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Yep, this needs a solution in updates asap!
My lower class was in constant need of simple clothes and furniture, but if I put everything to "simple only" now my higher class doesn't have access to luxury and factories are far less profitable. But if I put all of it to luxury then I might have a defficit of some rare good that is needed for production.
In theory it's possible to find a balance in economy by putting 70% of factories to one thing and 30% to the other, but with current UI with dozens of factories across dozens of states this is too micro-intensive

Or, you could just build a specialized luxury furniture factory in another state? It's not that complicated.
 
  • 5
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Or, you could just build a specialized luxury furniture factory in another state? It's not that complicated.
Seems like you have no idea what I was talking about. No, you can't "just build a factory" after 20+ years into the game when you handle dozens of them for each type and each has different production methods, especially if you keep conquering new territories and they also have factories with different production methods, and your population and needs keep changing, AND trade routes can be created and deleted without your input, also changing demand/supply. It's too annoying
 
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
I completely agree that the game is doing better than imperator and will be worked on.

However, I really hate this mentality. I'm sorry but the idea of we have to give good reviews so they'll fix the game is really messed up in my mind. Yes it makes sense but it completely goes against any sort of honesty principle. I dislike the game and want it to be better so I'm expected to lie, say it's great! So more people will buy it and maybe it'll be fixed because of this.
Who says you got to give positive reviews? I always give my games honest reviews at the time that I play them. If Vic 3 is in an unsatisfactory state when you play it, give it the honest review that you feel it deserves.
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Yep, this needs a solution in updates asap!
My lower class was in constant need of simple clothes and furniture, but if I put everything to "simple only" now my higher class doesn't have access to luxury and factories are far less profitable. But if I put all of it to luxury then I might have a defficit of some rare good that is needed for production.
In theory it's possible to find a balance in economy by putting 70% of factories to one thing and 30% to the other, but with current UI with dozens of factories across dozens of states this is too micro-intensive
If you don't want so many factories spread out over so many states, you could always downsize some factories and replace them with increased levels in your core states with existing factories. It ends up being more efficient too when you factor in economies of scale and the productivity bonus it gives. Though that comes with a trade-off of having less ability to fine tune your production of each good when your economic situation changes. But then again, economic management is the core gameplay loop of the Victoria franchise, so it's fitting for what the game is.
 
  • 7
  • 3
Reactions: