• 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 #65 - Patch 1.1 (part 1)

16_9.jpg

Hello and welcome to the second post-release dev diary for Victoria 3. Today we’ll be talking about the first major post-release patch, which we’re aiming to get to you before the end of the year. This patch (1.1) is going to primarily focus on game polish: bug fixing, balancing, AI improvements and UI/UX work, while the next major free patch (1.2) is going to be more focused towards making progress on the plans we’ve outlined in our Post-Release Plans DD by iterating on systems like warfare and diplomacy. With that said, there’s a few more significant changes coming in 1.1 as well, which we’re going to go over in this and next week’s dev diary.

The first of these changes is a rework of the interface for individual Pops, with a particular emphasis on improving the visualization of Pop Needs. In addition to the general overview, there are now separate tabs for Economy and Consumption, with Economy showing a more detailed breakdown of the Pop’s income and expenditure, as well as their top 5 Goods expenditures, and the Consumption tab showing a detailed breakdown of all their Goods expenditures, along with pricing information for the State and Market. We also plan to iterate on Pop Needs further in the future to give you a better idea of what your population needs are country-wide.

DD65_1.png


DD65_2.png

The next significant change in 1.1 is a rework of Legitimacy: some frequent criticisms we have received about the political system in Victoria 3 is that Legitimacy doesn’t matter enough and isn’t clear enough about its effects, as well as that elections don’t have enough of an impact. This rework aims to resolve all those problems by making several changes: First, legitimacy, while still a number from 0 to 100, is now divided into five categories with differing effects, some of which will increase or decrease based on the actual number and not just the threshold:
  • 0-24: Illegitimate Government: This government is considered blatantly illegitimate by most everyone in the country. This legitimacy level reduces the approval of all opposition IGs, makes it impossible to enact laws, and generates a steady stream of radicals in increased numbers the lower Legitimacy is.
  • 25-49: Unacceptable Government: This government is generally not considered acceptable to the people of the country. Laws can be enacted, but opposition IGs will disapprove and radicals will be created over time, though in amounts less than in an Illegitimate Government.
  • 50-74: Contested Government: This government is considered to have somewhat shaky foundations. Opposition IGs will disapprove slightly but otherwise there are no ill or good effects.
  • 75-89: Legitimate Government: This government is considered proper and legitimate. Over time a small number of Loyalists will be generated, with increased numbers the higher Legitimacy is.
  • 90-100: Righteous Government: This government’s legitimacy is considered to be unassailable. In addition to generating Loyalists over time, enactment time for new laws is cut in half.

The way you gain legitimacy has also been altered in democracies, with the share of votes (rather than just clout) represented in Government now having a direct effect on Legitimacy, the degree to which depends on the laws - under more restrictive voting systems, Clout can still be more important than votes, but as more of the population becomes enfranchised votes grow in importance and under Universal Suffrage it should be virtually impossible for a government that doesn’t have the voters behind it to be considered legitimate.

Despite being the largest party in terms of Clout, the Whigs alone are not considered Legitimate due to only commanding 47% of the votes in the last election.
DD65_3.png

Lastly for today, we’ve also made a balancing change to the Church and State and Citizenship laws - previously, the only balancing consideration for these laws was that less tolerance gave more Authority, which we felt was neither particularly balanced nor really a complete representation of the reasons that a country might want to discriminate against part of their population. To try and address this, we’ve made it so that by default, slightly more radicals are created by Standard of Living decreases than Loyalists from Standard of Living increases, but offset this with modifiers on the more restrictive laws that increase Loyalist and reduce Radical gain among the accepted parts of the population - the more restrictive your cultural/religious tolerance, the greater the effect on the part of the population that actually falls within it.

DD65_4.png

That’s it for today! Next week we’re going to continue talking about Patch 1.1, which as I said at the beginning of the dev diary is planned to be released before the end of the year. We’re also still working on another hotfix (1.0.6) which should hopefully include some late-game performance improvements and other fixes and which we are aiming to release sometime next week.
 
  • 272Like
  • 70Love
  • 16
  • 11
  • 5
  • 4Haha
Reactions:
I still have no idea why you've tied legitimacy to enactment time. If anything, there should be two different stats: government effectiveness (or something like it), which reduces with the addition of more IGs./Parties to the government and affects enactment time; and legitimacy, which should cause a bunch of radicals to be created whenever a reform is passed if it is low. A low legitimacy - high effectiveness government would therefore be able to quickly pass reforms, at the cost of massive numbers of radicals. While a high legitimacy - low effectiveness government (which would happen if you tried to stick every party into the government) would have much fewer radicals, but never get anything done. A single highly popular party would be the only way to get both high effectiveness and high legitimacy.
 
Last edited:
  • 24
  • 8Like
  • 1
Reactions:
This Is a great step for sure, but the war system needs some love. I'm not going to sit here and say we need HOI4 combat or Eu4 Combat (because that's not the point of the game and doesn't belong here), but it needs to be fixed. When you can lose as the Russian empire with 120 Battalions to the Kazakhs with 9 Battalions, when you have better mil tech and a 12:1 numbers advantage (but are still outnumbered in every little battle)... something is wrong
 
  • 8
  • 3
  • 2Like
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Thats looking really good.
Please add some ledgers as of why my pops are radicalizing themselves and hints of how to reverse that.

Also, please implement the cabinet :)
 
  • 6Like
Reactions:
Great content, still hope for improvement for historical accuracy and country differences reform (repost last week suggestions)

1. Great Qing should be freedom of conscience at start about be legacy slavery, Great Qing hasn't abolished their slave servant until 1910. What's more, Great Qing should be much weaker and harder to modernize. This is unbelievable Qing have the ability to mobilize battalion like a modern country. Eastern empire actually ruled their country in totally different logic with western country, it's unthinkable for Qing to build "university" on their game before they make decision to westernize. Because that would be rebellion to the traditional "KEJU" system. Also Qing totally have no interest to industrialize before they realize they need to innovation.

2. Europe country and united states should have more difference between countries to make more accurate to play different country. Britain should have intelligent group who is neutral attitude between monarchy and republic but more enlighten landowner and church, now Tory party have exactly same ideology with Bonapartist. Meanwhile it's hard to believe U.S petite Bourgeois opposed Republic and more favor to Monarchy and Theocracy.

3. I hope there will be more useful if I have more democratic laws, now democratic laws only lost authority if I enact universal suffrage. The change on content about legitimacy seems great on this issue.

4. I hope the leader of interest group have less influence for interest group. Now it's not plausible one interest group is super satisfied now and suddenly super radical socialist only because they change a leader and ignored that country is already super care about their interest on welfare or freedom of speech. What's more, I think there should be some more mechanic to permanent change interest group ideology. Like if country stay democratic and generous for workers, trade union should not believe communist or other radical belief. And the feminist law now have bug, after let trade union or intellegience accept feminist, it/s actually not working. They still hate female leader after feminist leader leave.

5. I totally agree with the strengthen of the discrimination law, but meanwhile, I hope the liberal citizen ship policy could have less penalty for authority. I think that cause a liberal society hard to gain consumption tax which propably should be announced by adminstration ability instead of authority.

6. Hope to strengthen private school and public school or weaken church school, It's hard to believe church school system have same innovation and education access when they teach student more to believe god blindly instead of scientific method

7. Hope path to socialism and path to fascism could be reblanced. Now it's super hard to stay democratic even you actually already satisfied your citizens, they still became radicalized for simply a leader changing and will forever became more radical to your country.

8. Since the change of democratic laws and more impact on voting, Maybe government form could also impact these? Parliament republic and President republic might more count on vote if they're democratic I think.

9. I think the political system is confusing now because now it had very vague definition of "government" and "opposition" concept, maybe the final structure of the game is to draw detail representation of parliament for democratic country if it's possible. For 1.10, I think maybe they can make a concept of "loyal opposition". Or maybe paradox define "government" itself is a coalition between all accept parliament member ( but to be honest, that definition is really awful) I think as long as paradox doesn't make a change to represent "parliament system", because under parliament system, opposition is also on parliament. Because liberal democratic system have total different ruling logic than Autocracy system, now they're sharing same system to represent their ruling situation. For example, it;s hard to imagine a "legitimate government" have same meaning under Democratic system and Autocracy system. But now they have same effect. What's more, I hope Paradox could provide more authority for democratic government if they're legitimate.

10. Hope for some strengthen to regular troops whether what the military law is. It's hard to believe conscription army could have same ability with regular armies. And I think the advantage for high technology army method should be strengthens. Irregular troops in history always have low morale to fight, skirmish army should always could easily against irregular troops. Same for Mechanic army also should easily defeated line infantry.
At the end of the day, I think Victoria 3 has big big potential, and might have the most mature economic system on historical strategic game until now. But I think more detailed system reformed and focus on historical accuracy and nation differences will make this game wonderful, or maybe one of the greatest historical strategic on this century. Hope for the best
 
Last edited:
  • 10Like
  • 4
Reactions:
If there is a pet peeve that I greatly detest, it is the constant need to scroll through. Frankly, I think Victoria 3, while I enjoyed the game, is the classic example of what to NOT do in this respect. I personally find scrolling to be more time consuming and less time-effective than, say, clicking through tabs, even with mouse-wheel button on my computer mouse. I strongly encourage Paradox to look into ways to minimize the need for scrolling as much as possible, at least where it would make sense.

Some of the possible options to deal with this would be making more use of tabs or adding filters, especially for the Market interface. Another option is to remove unnecessary or extraneous content such as portraits from Military interface (since you can see their portrait by another mean anyway). There are probably other options that I have not thought of or forgot.
 
  • 19
  • 3Like
  • 3
Reactions:
I assume the legitimacy changes are there to make it more difficult for players to create a "perfect" government composition to pass the laws they want. i.e. you can't necessarily just leave our high-vote/high-clout interest groups because they oppose your agency will no downside.

If so, I'd love to see the enactment mechanic tweaked. Perhaps basing it on the ratios of endorse/neutral/oppose within government.

It'd also be nice to have more certainty around the enactment process. I'm thinking something like CK3's scheme system - where the player can tweak stuff, speed it up, and increase it's chances, but still has a vague idea of how long it's going to take.
 
  • 3Like
  • 2
Reactions:
So, how are these new legitimacy changes going to affect the Meiji Restoration? Where you're expected to spend 10 years with a government that basically can't get legitimacy above 20 or so? Is it basically inevitable for that to cause a civil war?
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
So, how are these new legitimacy changes going to affect the Meiji Restoration? Where you're expected to spend 10 years with a government that basically can't get legitimacy above 20 or so? Is it basically inevitable for that to cause a civil war?
The Meiji Restoration caused a civil war, so I don't see a problem here.
 
  • 9Like
Reactions:
Not the biggest fan of low-legitimacy governments being totally barred from passing laws.

Maybe passing a law with an illegitimate government should produce a large number of radicals, but fully gatekeeping it doesn't make sense to me.

Other than that — love the direction you're moving in! Victoria 3 is a great game, just needs some polishing.
My recommendation would be to have greater resistance to canceling the law's passing, as well as restoring the old law if/when it does pass.

Something that can be managed in some capacity (even if civil war) but yes, not outright removed.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
sorry, mb such a subject already was discussed.
Now you can build any production in any province regardless if there are required resources in this province. In real, some industry is profitable to build near the source of resources and others in places of consumption.
For example, steel mills are built near metallurgical or coal mines. While the food industry and textile mills, to a greater extent, are built in places where the product will be consumed.
 
As others in the thread have asked, is there any way at all we can get a beta for 1.0.6 and potentially other patches going forward? Since (1) it would actually allow me to play through to the late game if the performance issues get fixed, and (2) it would probably help spot major bugs.
 
  • 6Like
Reactions:
I feel like "Unacceptable Government" fits better as the lowest bracket than "Illegitimate Government". At least to me, calling a government "illegitimate" sounds like a complaint, but calling it "unacceptable" sounds like they plan on doing something about it.
 
  • 5
  • 2
Reactions:
Those are good changes, but i still hope to see an improvement to diplomatic plays by adding addicional main wargoals and the AI to better judge of its situation.
Russia not meddling withing local diplomatic plays in South America would also be nice.