• 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:
Great read, I'm chuffed with the selection of topics to tackle! While there are some glaring issues with the game as of now, even despite them I enjoy it immensely, and can't wait to see how it evolves :)
 
  • 8
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
I would like to see a slowing down of the research/tech progress. Playing a Prussia then North German Confederation I was getting Dreadnoughts and Machin Guns in the 1880's on top of the production tech's that were far too advanced for the period. The tech tree moves way too quickly for the time period being played imo.
 
  • 22Like
  • 11
Reactions:
Excited to see this go from early access
This reads like a post-Early Access launch roadmap. Not that I don't want all of these improvements, but it's baffling that we got to a full price, 1.0 release with none of this in the game. Please consider actual early access in the future, or at least a vastly expanded beta program than the one you have now.
Yes.
 
  • 22
  • 20Like
  • 4
Reactions:
On the adding goals to diplomacy plays thing:
Maybe make things more ‘contingent’? Where added goals start as something like ‘if you don’t agree to the current primary goal(s), more will be added if this goes longer/becomes a war’, with maybe some kind of ‘hardening of positions’ mechanic, where the longer a play goes and the more drawn it it becomes, demands have possibility tendency to snowball? Maybe linked to domestic politics in some way?
 
  • 5
Reactions:
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.

View attachment 902219

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.
View attachment 901288
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.
View attachment 901289

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!
In regard of formation of Germany: make it more challenging but also more transparent about how to get support of german minors and lower infamy levels from unifucation
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I would like to see a slowing down of the research/tech progress. Playing a Prussia then North German Confederation I was getting Dreadnoughts and Machin Guns in the 1880's on top of the production tech's that were far too advanced for the period. The tech tree moves way too quickly for the time period being played imo.
Yeah I've got a few outstanding notes to myself to see what I can do to address that but not make it a painful process as a result. Don't want to just nerf tech spread into the ground though, need to find that middleground. But I am keeping eyes on it, and if you don't see it in the next few patches thats because I'm working on a few other things first.
 
  • 49
  • 42Like
  • 12
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions:
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!​

I must admit being impressed by these two sentences!

Looking forward to the journey, both the free and paid :)
 
  • 6
  • 3Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Historical Immersion, Visibility of Naval Mechanics and Reverse-swaying are top of the list of what I'd like to see after a week (it's been that long!?) of playing.
Really glad to see them feature in your post release plans!
I know right.

I had the week off and I looked at my steam time played and was "Oh I've been effectively working OT this week with just how much I have played this game" XD

Bless my wife who would check in on me and make sure I had drinks and would occasionally bring a snack <3
 
  • 7Love
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Excellent - welcome to see a bunch of stuff I wish for!

Now to save my economy from drowning (thanks France, you and your damn civil war ruined all my income from trade)
 
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,
Very disappointed to see that the devs double down on that system. With how microintensive every other part of the game turned out to be it STILL makes no sense whatsoever to insist on preventing any direct control only in one part of the state management but not in every other. Especially since we're "spirit of the nation" and not a president
 
  • 58
  • 31Like
  • 11
Reactions:
Glad to hear front splitting is going to be adressed, I dread going to war because of it, as its currently easy to get swamped by more military micro then in Victoria 2 as a small to medium nation.

Is the improved visialization of warfare going to be just peeks into the underlying mechanics (as in, why do battles happen the way to do), or are you also activly working on better map visualization? I admit once a front reaches the seas or foreign borders and encirclements happen, I often straight up can't tell where the front actually is. Especially as it tends to get burried under a lot of large icons. A Map mode which removes all visual clutter and just hights friendly and enemy territory in high contrast red and green would be useful.
 
  • 6Like
Reactions:
I for one think the war system foundation is solid, and correct. Just needs to be more fun and transparent.

Those saying they want to micro armies around the map are free to play every other Paradox game.
I agree with your opinion of the war system foundation, besides the annoying quirks and sometimes very frustrating battle unit numbers etc.. I prefer it to Vicky 2. but it’s not constructive to tell everyone with a different opinion to go kick rocks.
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. Instead of trying to actually focus on what the players like about their games, this team chose to knowingly alienate a portion of the crowd for really no reason, as I just said HOI4 already has a optional system of micro.

I love many parts of the game, and will keep supporting this, but this is not the hill vic3 should die on. It does so many other things right, that are defendable.
Warfare is by far the main focus of Hoi4 though, with equipment design and production second. Yes you can forgo 90% of micro in Hoi4, and put in Vicky 3 levels of player input via battle plans, but there will not be much else to do, and the game will be very boring.

A chief complaint about Vicky 2 was the sheer whack-a-mole warfare micro, as well how trivial it was to outmaneuver the AI to the point that AI nations were never intimidating to the player. You could always pull some matrix Neo Ninja moves and defeat them.

So why bother playing a smart or cautious diplomatic game, when warfare was always an objectively better solution. It devalued the core diplomatic mechanics of the game, that is the reason they went in this direction, not for no reason as you suggest.

Now of course it’s still very possible to outmaneuver the AI diplomatically and economically to the point of minors like Afghanistan being untouchable juggernauts by game’s end but such is life. You can disagree with the developers opinions, and implementation of warfare, but the idea of it is consistent with their stated goals of accentuating the importance of the non warfare based mechanics.
 
  • 21Like
  • 9
  • 6
Reactions:
  • 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)
There definitely should be a way to press the matter into a war or more demands and to prevent the enemy from just backing down. If I want to conquer 5 out of 6 of my weak neighbor's states why he has an option to slowly buy time for himself? I want the land now, when I'm stronger
 
  • 7
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
This reads like a post-Early Access launch roadmap. Not that I don't want all of these improvements, but it's baffling that we got to a full price, 1.0 release with none of this in the game. Please consider actual early access in the future, or at least a vastly expanded beta program than the one you have now.

Indeed it is awkward for devs to highlight so many fundamentals gameplay area to rebuild from scratch or pretty much so closely after release. This simply underlines the game was released before it was ready.

And before someone suggest I should be happy they want to redesign bad features through patch, I stand by the opinion that once a game is released too early, it is a loose - loose situation. A game should not have 4 big area of rework only a week after release. It is insane unless the game is a Pre-Release.

Hell a game like Mount and Blade Bannerlord was released as Early Access and yet did not need such post release hotfix plan

I also agree with the user who voiced surprise at the conflicting statement that Victoria 3 is a huge success and the devs are taking all the feedback provided. It is either one or the other since the feedback is mostly negative period.

The only good is that, sometimes, bad games are eventually turned into okayish / nice game like Ghost Recon Breakpoint. But not great games.
 
  • 31
  • 22Like
  • 5
Reactions: