• 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:
This is easy to assume, but actually not the case. Even in Universal Voting, votes are magnified by x20. We don't know why, but it has nothing to do with wealth really, it's just literally "everyone who votes casts 20 votes"
When I say something along the lines of "things like" it's not meant to be an exhaustive list. I did a quick double check and it seems like it is just wealth and votes that impact clout/political power - I left it open some other consideration I may have forgotten.

Votes in Universal Suffrage are rated at x20, because that is what they count towards the political power (in addition to wealth, which always applies even in Universal Voting - or even if you don't have voting at all) because that would still have a mitigating effective on the influence of wealth on the political clout received.

So I feel that it's that the system is not clear (the numbers should 100% be normalized towards the actual people voting - including making sure politically disengaged and/or disenfranchised people are not voting). So having said that, I suspect it's not deliberate on their part and it's fair enough to classify it as a bug since it's showing the political power contribution in the screen, rather than the votes received.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Wonderful, besides my constant want for Warfare to be entirely overhauled, can we please get some sort of unemployment map mode? It's so frustrating trying to find where my unemployment is
 
  • 15Like
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?
I think the point is that you build buildings that empower the Pops you need to support the IGs you need to change Laws - you don't just kick out the Shogunate, you wait for them to grow weaker.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Excuse me, can the 1.06 patch repair my collapse? Because I have been unable to play Victoria 3 for many days
 
It's good to see the Multiplayer Interest Group at Paradox Suppressed at last, so we can finally pass the game change from Internal Management Mechanics Toothless to Internal Management Mechanics Somewhat Challenging.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Wonderful, besides my constant want for Warfare to be entirely overhauled, can we please get some sort of unemployment map mode? It's so frustrating trying to find where my unemployment is
You know what I really want?

I wanna be able to see unemployeds and infrastructure usage on this panel:
 

Attachments

  • unemployeds pls.png
    unemployeds pls.png
    527,1 KB · Views: 0
  • 9Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
I think the point is that you build buildings that empower the Pops you need to support the IGs you need to change Laws - you don't just kick out the Shogunate, you wait for them to grow weaker.
Yes, I'm talking about after you do that. Once the Shogunate is no longer powerful, you kick them out of government then wait 10 years where they have to be out of government and not powerful. Because of the penalty for extra IGs in government, the only way to get above 25% legitimacy in an absolute monarchy is to either have a single IG with over 25% legitimacy, or to put the monarch's IG in government for the +50 legitimacy bonus. Or so to Low or Very Low taxes I guess, but I'm not convinced the Meiji Restoration should require that. Even when the Shogunate is at 15% or so, I usually have the Industrialists at maybe 20-25% and another IG or two at or slightly below 20%. I guess if they rework how legitimacy is gained this may no longer be true, but if it is, waiting 10 years at less than 25% legitimacy sounds... dangerous under the new mechanics.
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
Reactions:
On topic of legitimacy, I hope you will also readjust how the number is calculated. Better yet, in an ideal world you'd split law enactment time and legitimacy (meaning political legitimation/representation) into two separate things.

I'll show you the somewhat extreme example of my current government:

View attachment 907518

It doesn't get more legitimate than this: all parties on board, no opposition, everyone loyal. They represent 99.458% of my population and they're all happy to be part of the government and there are no major complaints about the enacted laws.

Fun fact, even the remaining 0.542% of my population, who are represented by the marginalized IG's, are either happy or at least not unhappy:

View attachment 907551

Yet my legitimacy is merely at 86%, which would be considered only "legitimate" instead of "righteous".

View attachment 907519

So the size is the problem. I'd have to kick out one IG from the government to make it more legitimate? I'd have to rob a sizeable part of my population from political representation to have a more legitimate government? Really?

That doesn't make any sense! The more people are directly part of the government through the IG's/parties they belong to, the more legitimate they should view the government.

What should suffer with so many parties on board is the law enactment time (we already have the debate/stalling risks with opposed IG's in the government, which is fair and fine). A big government with many interests to balance needs time to act. But its legitimacy should not be in question here. Not when 99.458% of my people's political interests are directly represented in the stable and loyal government.

Please, separate legitimacy and enactment time, that is what would solve the issue.
Bigger coalition doesn't always equate to a more legitimate government. In fact, if you add everyone, most people wouldn't think of your mixture as very legitimate. To give an extreme example - democrats in the USA have a government. If they decided to add some fascist to it (actual fascist, if such a party exists, not republicans), it wouldn't be considered more legitimate, but quite the opposite. Once you mix too many different parties, even members of those parties which are nominally in the government might not support it.
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
Maybe putting some bounds on what kind of leaders will lead IGs i.e. only when radicalized will IGs seek radical leaders? I reached a point in an uber liberal Sweden playthrough where after a period of decades of continuous increase in SoL, GDP growth - led by the intelligentsia - and overall interest group happiness I got my political system divided in two blocks: army + trade unions led by a communist versus intelligentsia + industrialists led by... a fascist. How the hell did I speedrun Weimar Germany on a #1 Sweden is beyond me
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I think the point is that you build buildings that empower the Pops you need to support the IGs you need to change Laws - you don't just kick out the Shogunate, you wait for them to grow weaker.
Yeah, in my experience, it's been a process of steadily undermining the shogunate's power until I can just kick them out of the government without losing almost all of my legitimacy. I've never tried kicking them out while they're still really powerful. I keep them in and switch around the other IG's to try to push laws through that slower weaken the shogunate. I wish there was some kind of just straight up civil war option, based on the Boshin War, but alas, that doesn't appear to be an option.
 
Yeah, in my experience, it's been a process of steadily undermining the shogunate's power until I can just kick them out of the government without losing almost all of my legitimacy. I've never tried kicking them out while they're still really powerful. I keep them in and switch around the other IG's to try to push laws through that slower weaken the shogunate. I wish there was some kind of just straight up civil war option, based on the Boshin War, but alas, that doesn't appear to be an option.
When you do kick the Shogunate out, what IGs do you have in government, what's their clout, and how much legitimacy do you end up with?
 
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.
Good idea, but I think the problem you mentioned is not only unique to the Qing Dynasty. In 1836, many countries had the same problem.
Maybe we can reduce the number of technologies initially owned by the Qing Dynasty to reduce the development speed of the Qing Dynasty.
In addition, some new laws can also be added, such as the hereditary military service system, which will allow only a few people to join the army and limit the upper limit of the army.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
好主意,但我认为你提到的问题不仅是清朝独有的。1836年,许多国家都遇到了同样的问题。
也许我们可以减少清朝最初拥有的技术数量,以降低清朝的发展速度。
此外,还可以加入一些新的法律,比如世袭兵役制度,将只允许少数人参军,并限制军队的上限。
Great idea, I just proposed Qing empire as an example because I'm more familiar with Qing history. Maybe nerf peasant levies could help to limit unindustrialized country's military power. Cause I think Paradox might have no intention to add more type of law in short term.
 
It's good to see the Multiplayer Interest Group at Paradox Suppressed at last, so we can finally pass the game change from Internal Management Mechanics Toothless to Internal Management Mechanics Somewhat Challenging.
Turn up AI aggression, game is less of a cakewalk. Or are you already playing on all max difficulty?
 
On topic of legitimacy, I hope you will also readjust how the number is calculated. Better yet, in an ideal world you'd split law enactment time and legitimacy (meaning political legitimation/representation) into two separate things.

I'll show you the somewhat extreme example of my current government:

View attachment 907518

It doesn't get more legitimate than this: all parties on board, no opposition, everyone loyal. They represent 99.458% of my population and they're all happy to be part of the government and there are no major complaints about the enacted laws.

Fun fact, even the remaining 0.542% of my population, who are represented by the marginalized IG's, are either happy or at least not unhappy:

View attachment 907551

Yet my legitimacy is merely at 86%, which would be considered only "legitimate" instead of "righteous".

View attachment 907519

So the size is the problem. I'd have to kick out one IG from the government to make it more legitimate? I'd have to rob a sizeable part of my population from political representation to have a more legitimate government? Really?

That doesn't make any sense! The more people are directly part of the government through the IG's/parties they belong to, the more legitimate they should view the government.

What should suffer with so many parties on board is the law enactment time (we already have the debate/stalling risks with opposed IG's in the government, which is fair and fine). A big government with many interests to balance needs time to act. But its legitimacy should not be in question here. Not when 99.458% of my people's political interests are directly represented in the stable and loyal government.

Please, separate legitimacy and enactment time, that is what would solve the issue.
Likewise, the opposite is also true; a monarchy with the biggest IG in government shouldn't be seen as particularly illegitimate. I'm pretty sure the tsar's government wasn't contested for legitimacy, at least before 1900. Or the shogun's. Or the Kaisers. At least, so long as the liberal factions are content and minor.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
When you do kick the Shogunate out, what IGs do you have in government, what's their clout, and how much legitimacy do you end up with?
I think it's usually the Intelligentsia and the Industrialists mainly. They'll have clout in the high teens or low 20s. I don't remember what kind of legitimacy numbers I usually have while I'm waiting for the timer on the restoration, but I would guess 50ish give or take like 10 or 15%. Usually by then I've passed most of the laws I've been trying to pass, so I'm not as concerned about it.

Makes sense that those two IG's would wind up with the most clout since the entire time I'm building up industry, building universities, and expanding the bureaucracy.