• 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 #71 - Autonomous Investment in 1.2

16_9.jpg

Hello and welcome to another Victoria 3 dev diary! Today’s diary marks the start of dev diaries about Patch 1.2, which is the next major upcoming patch for Victoria 3 (release date to be announced). As with 1.1, 1.2 will contain a slate of bug fixes, UX improvements, AI improvements and so on, but also some more significant changes to game mechanics, which we’re going to go over in these dev diaries.

The particular changes we’ll be talking about today, as alluded to by the title, is Autonomous Investment, which is something we said we were going to look into for our post-release plans back in Dev Diary #64. What we said back then is that while we are never going to take construction out of the hands of the player entirely, we were open to the idea of non-government entities constructing buildings in a way not directly controlled by the country, and what we came up with is a system where the Investment Pool will be used by private entities to construct different types of buildings depending on your economic laws.

Before going over how all this works, I first want to mention that we recognize that the community is somewhat split on the issue of autonomous construction, and as such, we’ve opted to create a new Game Rule for Autonomous Investment. By default, Autonomous Investment is enabled, which puts the Investment Pool out of the hands of the player, but you can choose to disable it, which puts the Investment Pool back in the player’s hands and makes it work exactly as it does in the current 1.1.2 version of the game.

The Investment Pool Game Rule allows you to enable or disable autonomous construction with Investment Pool funds, depending on your personal preference
DD71_1.png


DD71_2.png

Regardless of whether Autonomous Investment is enabled, the Investment Pool works pretty much the same as it did before: Certain Pop Types with ownership shares in buildings pay part of their dividends into the Investment Pool, the funds in which can then be drawn on for construction. There are, however, a few key differences in 1.2 compared to 1.1.

Firstly, the types of Pops that invest have been expanded from just Aristocrats and Capitalists to also include Farmers and Shopkeepers. Capitalists invest the highest percentage of their dividends (20%), followed by Aristocrats at 10%, with Farmers and Shopkeepers investing only 5% each. The rationale here is that it wasn’t only the wealthiest in society who invested in new businesses, and this also allows a small degree of investment under laws which strip ownership away from the Capitalists and Aristocrats (but more on that next week).

Secondly, the proportion of dividends that are paid into the Investment Pool varies in 1.1 based on your laws, which can have some pretty bizarre effects, such as switching to Laissez-Faire suddenly creating a bunch of Capitalist Radicals because they are now investing more money and thus end with a drop in their Wealth. The proportion of funds that are invested is now a fixed percentage based on pop type, which is then subjected to an efficiency bonus: Capitalists always invest 20% of their dividends, for example, but under Laissez-Faire, this investment is more efficient and ends up contributing more money to the Investment Pool.

There is also a general investment efficiency bonus for payments into the Investment Pool in small and mid-sized economies, and a penalty in very large ones, to ensure the Investment Pool is also relevant for mid-sized countries while not growing to such absurd proportions that it cannot possibly be spent in a 10 billion GDP country. These efficiency bonuses are meant to abstract a system of foreign investment, which is something we’ve also mentioned is on our radar in Dev Diary #64 but is a bigger rework that we are not tackling yet in patch 1.2.

Agrarianism gives a hefty bonus to the investments of your Farmers and Aristocrats, but reduces investments from Capitalists and greatly limits the types of buildings they can put their money into.
DD71_3.png

So how then, does the Investment Pool funds get turned into buildings when Autonomous Investment is enabled? Well, autonomously, of course! With Autonomous Investment, the Construction Queue is split into Private and Government Constructions, with Government Constructions being anything (regardless of whether it’s a Government building or not) ordered to be built or auto-expanded by the player or country-level AI, while a Private Construction is anything the Pops themselves are building. The Construction capacity of the country will be split between the Private and Government queues in a proportion based on your economic law, though if there isn’t enough constructions queued of one type to use its full allocation, the excess can be used by the other queue instead.

In the construction screen, you’ll be able to see what the next planned Private Construction will be, along with its current funding level. The funding level is a calculated value based on both the total funds available in the Investment Pool as well as the weekly funds coming into it, and can fluctuate based on the Market price of Goods used in construction. Once a project is funded and ready, it’ll be added to the private Construction Queue the next tick. Private Constructions, unlike Government ones, cannot be reprioritized or canceled - they will always be built in the order they are queued up by the Pops.

Though the Government is currently building nothing in France, there are several private constructions in progress, and plans for the expansion of the Alsace-Lorraine iron mines. Note that this UI is highly WIP!
DD71_4.png

Pop-ordered constructions use a variant of the standard construction AI which doesn’t take into account the country-level AI’s strategic objectives and prioritizes the creation of profitable buildings which will create lucrative jobs for the investing Pop types, but they will also take some more ‘strategic’ factors into account, such as building railroads in low-infrastructure states. Just as with the country-level AI, they also have access to the system of Spending Variables described in Dev Diary #59, which means that they do not operate on a snapshot of the current Market but understand factors such as the impact that already queued buildings (private and government-ordered both) will have on prices once completed and staffed.

Since Autonomous Investment does not only affect player countries, you might be wondering how well this system works together with the AI? The answer is that it actually works quite well! Together with a bunch of AI improvements and fixes in 1.2, this has resulted in more stable economic growth for AI countries and especially seems to have given Great Britain a boost, as the private sector doing its own thing means that the economy is usually growing even if the country’s treasury is having issues, at least as long as the Pops investing into private-sector growth are making healthy profits. There’s still some issues, particularly when AI runs out of available workforce late game, that we are hoping to tackle before 1.2 releases to further improve the AI’s economic growth.

Screenshot from a hands-off game taken in 1908. While there’s certainly still room for improvement and some countries like France and Prussia have underperformed due to wars and turmoil (and Austria continues to overperform compared to history), it’s definitely looking better than in 1.1.2.
DD71_5.png

That’s it for today! Join us again next week as we go over more changes to the economy in 1.2, with a particular focus on Economic Laws and the introduction of Government Shares in buildings.
 
  • 182Like
  • 75Love
  • 15
  • 10
  • 1
Reactions:
I wholeheartedly believe that in an economy GSG, player agency should mainly be applied to policies, incentives and disincentives for uncontrolled agents to pursue their interests in various ways.

This should be greatly expanded, true.
Hear hear. Macromanagement should be the name of the game
 
  • 4Like
  • 3
Reactions:
Cool! Glad to see the freer the market, the more impoverished your capitalists get being fixed! It was humorous, but still a touch annoying.

That being said, does the proportionate source of Investment affect the weight of the buildings assigned for private construction? For example, in the USA with the issues of south vs. north, will Aristocrats just freely give their money towards capitalist buildings if the productivity of those buildings are higher than more plantations and other aristocrat owned goods?

Second, does the state still pay all employment costs for construction workers, even if the construction is being used for private construction?

(Freeing up more money, e.g. increasing investment efficiency, I think is fine, as an aside, as much of it would naturally be representing the removal of costly legal barriers that inhibit investment. Considering the supply of money in reality isn't fixed thanks to things like loans, its probably never going to work to get a simulation to work with fixed currency supply either.)
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
One thing to avoid in Vic3 was building industries in low wage colonial provinces, as that meant outsourcing the production and lead to unemployment in home states of those businesses. Is there anything stopping the AI capitalists from constantly doing exactly that? I am worried it's gonna mean a lot of weird micro, of downgrading PMs in states we don't want some industries in or demolishing buildings capitalist built.
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
The biggest threat I see in this update is the legendary Paradox AI behind this "feature" and it fears me to the bone. So it would take another weeks after 1.2 until modders will fix the AI for PDX. Autonomous things are only good when the AI behind it, is well made and PDX proved over a decade now that's not something they are really good at - also the UIX in this game was one of the worst I've ever experienced. Due to the amount of micromanagement you have to do, the game is almost unplayable without UI mods [most to mentioned are all the market UI improvements]. So I'm excited to see how bad the UI will be for the new features they've planned <3

But still I love the game and I love how they try to improve it and by all UI shaming, the art and art design is one of the most beautiful I've seen in strategy games. I just want to make clear that there are great deficits in the dev team. Every click over one is one click too much, and the import/export/market interface is a potential reason of a carpal tunnel syndrome.
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Seems like a fun and interesting new feature. But I'm kinda taken aback that 1.2 is called a patch. Fixing the glaring issues in the game first would be a patch. This is going to be a major release. And you're apparently postponing the bugfixes until this new feature is done? Probably giving us another new list of issues to be solved by modders.

Can't you release a stable version of the game first before releasing new features? You made the same mistake right before the christmas break by making major changes to the legitimacy system. Gib patch 1.1.3 pls.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
All I will say is that the construction AI should have been improved significantly before even thinking about such a feature. It's clear that trade is broken right now because the AI fails to develop even basic resources. Why would I hand my economy over to such an AI?
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
All I will say is that the construction AI should have been improved significantly before even thinking about such a feature. It's clear that trade is broken right now because the AI fails to develop even basic resources. Why would I hand my economy over to such an AI?
Well the thing is, here the AI is much simpler than the AI of the entire country. It's just queening up buildings, that are most profitable to the owner pop type. They won't plan ahead or develop new resources, just expand/build new things that already work for them.
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
But I'm kinda taken aback that 1.2 is called a patch.
Paradox always call their free updates "Patch x.y(.z)".

(They additionally label some of them as "hotfixes".)

You're not likely to get a 1.1.3 at this point, however nicely you ask for one.
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
You're right actually, though that's such an edge case I'm not sure it's worth throwing an investment modifier on them just for art academies.
I get that academics contributing to the investment pool is rare. But would it be hard to make them contribute?

I'm imagining its just one line tweak to their profession file (saying that they contribute 5%), thinking if laws modify give a bonus/penalty (they fund less under agrarianism), and at worst (if this isn't auto generated from other info) having a list of buildings they would prefer to build (more fine art buildings)
Wizzington it's very nice to see you answering on dd (and general forum), it makes us (or at least me) see that the community is heard, I hope it will continue
I'd second this. The responses to questions in this thread have been superb.

Agrarianism in 1.2 has a few buildings for Capitalists to invest in, like Logging Camps and Fisheries.
Could you take those restrictions about which buildings each law can use the investment fund to build out of those laws now? Already with the capitalists putting less $ into the investment fund and aristocrats putting more in you should get more agricultural buildings. That feels like a very natural way to have different laws with different emphasis on what buildings are made.

They could stay part of the law effects when you have manual controlled investment funds in the game rules. That would make the manual control game rule have both pros and cons, rather than just pros.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Well the thing is, here the AI is much simpler than the AI of the entire country. It's just queening up buildings, that are most profitable to the owner pop type. They won't plan ahead or develop new resources, just expand/build new things that already work for them.
That sounds awfully similar to the AI constructing buildings that are not in my broader national interest but in their limited interest. In other words, the removal of national considerations make their actions worse for me. Again, making me wonder why I would turn on such a feature.

A lot of people seem to hope that there will be less micro in the game with this feature but I only foresee more. Because of everything else I need to monitor I now also need to pay attention to whatever the capitalist AI is trying to do and immediately respond so it doesn't fall flat on its face.
 
  • 6
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Again, making me wonder why I would turn on such a feature.
You probably wouldn't.

And that's okay, because this feature is not for you (or me!).

This feature is for the people who want to deal with at least some semblance of an important real obstacles of running a country: the proprietorial classes placing their own interests ahead of those of the ineffable landgeist of the country.
 
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions:
  • 1
Reactions:
It's much more than just automation.
However, I do agree that manual PM management for industries built from investment pool shouldn't exist. But for entirely different reasons: it shouldn't be too easy to steal what pops have (and they paid their money for those buildings, they're theirs). And right now it is too simple, done with a simple click of a button (say, "make this railroad government-run").
Yeah, I could see this being a bit of an issue. I guess the rules outlined here are basically:
  • Aristocrats will build "aristocrat" buildings, increasing the political weight of aristocrats and agricultural workers
  • Capitalists will build "capitalist" buildings, increasing the weight of capitalists and industrial workers
But aren't some buildings "aristocratic" or "capitalistic" only by virtue of which PMs they use? And the player can just boot the old "owners" out immediately?
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Can decrees be used to encourage the AI to invest in certain industries? And are there any plans to allow the AI to coordinate with the player in i.e. wars by investing in the arms industry?
 
  • 4Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Why are you assuming they won't be doing both, like most PDX's major releases?
Complainant is taking issue with there not being a 1.1.3 bugfix patch prior to the 1.2 feature patch.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Well, I'm (pleasantly) surprised to see this idea implemented in the second major update. If I had to guess, I would have expected it for 1.3 or 1.4.

After thinking a bit, I find rather smart to limit the scope of the Autonomous Investment AI (AIAI... is it on purpose?) as you did : it will allow the player to understand much better what actions the AI will take.

That being said, even if there are few drawbacks in Vicky III to have "useless" buildings appear, I still have some questions about the choices the AI could make :
  1. Are the local wages going to be taken into account ? While logical, it opens to some issues with colonial offshore manufacturing...
  2. Will the AIAI (heh) take into account local infrastructure when choosing where to build? It would be somewhat annoying to have our colonies infrastructure hogged up by industrial buildings which can be built anywhere else...
  3. Can the AIAI choose the best spot to build something based on the throughput bonus (both building wise and state-traits wise)? Concentration of industry is a powerful tool to maximize GDP (and productivity!), and besides my OCD would find it very annoying if all my states were to have 12 industry types (not to mention the UI nightmare of having to scroll through all of them)
  4. What about qualifications?
I'm optimistic, but I think it could become fairly annoying to be stuck in a loop where the Pillar Men AIAI decide to build something somewhere you absolutely DO NOT want, and keep having to delete it, making you loosing all the value of your investment pool.

Anyway, that's my worries. Keep the good work though, I love (most of ) what the team have done so far with Vicky III!
 
  • 2
  • 1Like
Reactions: