• 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 #110 - Building Ownership & Foreign Investment

16_9.png

Hello and welcome to another Victoria 3 Dev Diary!

After last week’s look at Power Blocs, we are going to take a look at another major set of changes that are going to arrive with Sphere of Influence and the free 1.7 update.

Namely, a revision of the Building Ownership system and what it allows us to do: Foreign Investment, a much requested feature which makes its debut in 1.7.

You will see that the changes we are making impact your visibility of ownership and the affected Pops throughout the game.

To understand all the mechanics we will be looking at an example country in the heart of Europe.

Ownership types​

It’s 1836. In Bavaria, a proud member of the Zollverein Power Bloc, all buildings are owned by the state or the workers themselves.

Capitalists, Aristocrats, and Clergymen no longer work in these buildings, and most of the Shopkeepers no longer work in production buildings directly. In addition, the Ownership Production Methods have been removed. Instead, ownership works on a per level basis, allowing a mixed ownership structure in the same building.

A popular Logging Camp it seems. Workers, a Financial District and a Manor House own a part.
DD110_01.png

In worker-owned buildings employees work for themselves basically. So any dividends they may accumulate, they split amongst themselves. This is the default at game start for many countries (not all) and is a state which you can more or less return to at a later stage of the game with the enactment of Cooperative Ownership, which will expropriate your privately owned buildings over time.

One major exception from the ownership situation at game start are subsistence farms which are owned by a new building we are introducing: Manor Houses.

Now they lounge around in luxury, instead of slumming it with the common folks in less refined taste buildings, we wouldn't want their shoes to be dirtied on a subsistence farm!
Manor Houses are able to own levels of other buildings, in our case at game start all the levels of Subsistence Farms in their own states. They pay their wages and dividends by collecting dividends from the buildings they own and distributing them among their employees.
What type and how many employees they have is determined by a limited set of PMs.

Clergymen or Aristocrats? You can’t get rid of both of them!
DD110_02.png

So you can see there are still jobs for Clergymen. What about the Shopkeepers and Capitalists?
Well, they work in the new Financial District buildings, which behave pretty much like the Manor Houses. They too have different employment PMs, can own levels of other buildings and pay their employees by collecting dividends from owned building levels.

Both new buildings expand automatically, depending on how many levels they own. For example if a new level of a privately owned factory is created, a corresponding new level of a Financial District is also generated.

All building levels that you construct are country-owned. Under certain laws, this status can change soon after they are finished constructing. Country-owned buildings come with reduced Economy of Scale bonuses and a bureaucracy cost for each level you own. But in return they can provide additional income based on the building’s dividends which partially get transferred to your treasury.

Not all buildings can be of any ownership type of course, for example barracks or government administrations will always be country-owned.

Summing up, there are now three types of ownership for any building level:
  • Worker owned
  • Privately owned (Financial Districts and Manor Houses)
  • Country owned

If all buildings in Bavaria are owned by the workers or the country itself, how do the first Financial Districts appear, you may wonder!

The main way to get that to happen is the next point on our agenda.

Privatization​

Enter Privatization, whereby you allow country-owned buildings to be sold to Pops.

If you are short on cash, Privatization might help you
DD110_03.png

This makes it possible for your Pops to acquire them. Depending on the type of building you are privatizing, they usually get bought either by Aristocrats or Capitalists, using the investment pool’s funds.
If you don’t have any capitalists in your country yet, other Pops may step up though, using the investment pool’s funds to buy a building you put up for sale and become Capitalists in the process, which in turn leads to the first Financial District appearing.

The money will be transferred from the investment pool to your country’s treasury once that happens. The cost of buying a level is determined by its construction cost and is modified by most of the Economic System laws. These laws also affect the efficiency of these transactions, meaning how much money is lost as overhead and how much is being reinvested into the investment pool or the treasury.
One particularly interesting law is Laissez-Faire which upon enactment forces all your country-owned buildings to be put up for sale and will automatically do so for every new building level you construct. Similarly, enactment of other laws like Cooperative Ownership and Command Economy doesn’t immediately change the ownership of all buildings, but rather can start a process that can convert your economy over time.

Insert witty joke about the free market here
DD110_04.png

Now let’s take a look at how the different ownership model affects investments from your Pops.

Investment​

The existing logic for how the private investment pool works remains similar to before. So, different Pop types still have different priorities and they will look at factors like estimated productivity, available workforce etc.
When a building is about to be constructed by private investment, we randomly determine who is building it, favoring already existing Financial Districts and Manor Houses over creating new ones.

In a worker-owned economy, the private investment pool will continue to function, but they will only expand their own buildings, not create new ones.

An important fact with this system is that investments do not need to be local. A Financial District or Manor House can invest in any of your country’s states, including your colonies overseas.
This system will create a flow of money from the colonies to your homelands, a stronger centralization of wealth and power and it will end the status of colonies’ Pops making more money than your Pops at home.

Of course the non-local investments also come with some challenges with regards to other countries.

It looks like Prussia has heard about that option and has started investing in your country!

“First they took our chairs, then the tables we used to eat at. What’s next? Our beds?!”
DD110_05.png

Foreign Investment​

There are a few ways to acquire Foreign Investment Rights.

First of all, overlords can always invest in their subjects. This is part of the free 1.7 update and will allow you to do Foreign Investment where it matters the most, even if you do not own Sphere of Influence.

Then there are three diplomatic pacts which you can use if you have bought the expansion:
  1. Mutual Investment Rights which allows both countries to invest in each other
  2. One-directional Investment Rights in either direction, so you either demand to be allowed to invest in their country or offer another country to invest in yours

The [redacted] has been [redacted]. We shall see its effects on the 11. of April.
DD110_06.png

There is also a Power Bloc Principle group that deals with Foreign Investment which on Tier 3 has the consequence of being able to invest in any member country.

No matter how you got the Investment Rights, you and also your Pops will be able to invest in the target country. Private investment does consider foreign states as potential targets for their expansions, allowing them to build profitable buildings more easily.

As nice as it is that Prussia has invested in new buildings in Bavaria, I don’t think we can let them get away with diverting the profits to Berlin instead of our own population!

Nationalization​

Nationalization allows you to take control of foreign assets in your country. You cannot nationalize other countries’ assets as long as they possess Foreign Investment rights in your country.

Once that is no longer the case, e.g. if Bavaria left the Zollverein Power Bloc, you can peacefully nationalize their building levels in your country. For that you need to pay a sum of money from your treasury. Similarly to Privatization, the sum is determined by the construction cost + modifiers from laws.

You will also be able to nationalize your own Pops’ building levels, both worker-owned and privately owned, if you’d like to take ownership. Nationalization is not seen positively by the affected Pops of course and will radicalize them.

“We should compensate them to reduce the quarrels.”
DD110_07.png

But what if the Bavarian coffers are empty yet you still want to take over that juicy productive Furniture Manufacturies that is owned by Prussia?

Well, there is always an alternative.

“Pay them? I don’t think so!”
DD110_08.png

You can demand nationalization of a country’s assets in your country. If they accept, their building levels’ ownership changes to your country. If they don’t, you can try and enforce it as a wargoal. If you are successful, you will also remove their Foreign Investment Rights for your country in addition to taking control of their buildings in your country.

Building Registry​

To visualize all these new mechanics, we are introducing the Building Registry, which allows you a customizable look at your country’s situation.

All the building data one could wish for
DD110_09.png

This is a major new UI, that similar to the Census Data window, comes with a lot of functionality to filter the available data. Only show buildings outside your country? Sure. See all buildings that are owned by Pops and which are currently not hiring but not fully employed? No problem.

Lots of filter groups to browse through
DD110_10.png

We hope you find this as useful as we do. You can access it via the button on the bottom of the Buildings panel.

Really recommend pressing that button
DD110_11.png

Implications for the Directly Controlled Investment Pool Game Rule​

As you can imagine, this new system of ownership, geographic wealth extraction, and privatization/nationalization has far-reaching implications on the economic foundations of Victoria 3. It enables a lot of interesting dynamics we haven't been able to model until this time and adds a whole new dimension to your economic laws.

It also comes with the consequence of making the Directly Controlled Investment Pool game rule that we introduced with 1.2 (as a legacy alternative to the new Autonomous Investment system) impossible to maintain. In 1.6 and prior, if this game rule was turned on, the player would be directing all construction efforts. As long as there was money in the investment pool and the construction queue was building a privately-owned building, the cost of construction goods would be coming out of the investment pool first before being carried by the state budget. With the new rules for building ownership, investment rights, and so on in 1.7 this no longer makes sense - there's now a very clear distinction between a building project initiated by a private investor and the state, a potential source of conflict innate to both foreign ownership and the privatization/nationalization mechanics, and even differences between owners in different regions that cannot be represented if all construction projects were player-initiated.

Because of this it no longer makes sense for players to be in charge of both public and private investments simultaneously, and as such the Directly Controlled Investment Pool rule has had to be removed for 1.7 and beyond. While we can't support non-default game rules to the same degree as the standard options, removing a game rule completely is not something we'd ever do without good cause. We know that a smaller fraction of you favored this setting so we want to be clear with why its removal was a necessity to move forward with these improvements to ownership and foreign expansion.

Outlook​

I would like to end today’s Dev Diary by providing a short outlook for what these changes also enable us to do in the future.

The main thing here is affecting Companies.

The way we have reworked ownership allows us to create Company headquarter buildings which can then own specific building levels of industries they care about, determining its profitability from and providing their throughput bonuses only to these. While we cannot provide a concrete timeline for that change at this point, it is something we would like to tackle for one of our next free updates.

That’s it for today. Check back next week when Mikael is going to walk you through what changes 1.7 and Sphere of Influence brings to relations and interactions between Overlords and Subjects, including how these foreign investment mechanics relate to your grip over your extended empire.

Overview for all upcoming Dev Diaries:
Date Topic
4th AprilSubject Interactions
11th AprilLobbies and More on Power Blocs
18th AprilThe Great Game
25th AprilThe Art of Sphere of Influence
2nd MayChangelog 1.7
 
  • 194Love
  • 128Like
  • 9
  • 8
  • 4
Reactions:
Absolutely splendid dev diary that resparks my joy and interest in the game.

I have two questions:
1. What, if anything, happens with dividend transfers when the investor country and invested in country are ar war unrelated to nationalisation? I think it would be very odd if the transfers continued.
2. Will you be able to decide from whom exactly you want to take sector levels' ownership? What if I want to nationalise only worker-owned levels, but they are chronologically intermingled with, say, financial district-owned levels?
3. How numerous will be manors and financial districts? Will most aristocrats and capitalists in UK live in Middlesex, with none in Wales?
 
Last edited:
  • 4
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I am not sure i like th is. I understand it. But if feels weird, gamey and unrealistic. You have basically gone back to the Vicky 2 system which is much better, why not fully? The state should not be able to build any private industries under laissez fair. Thats part of the cool stuff about the simulation. Your play style also matching the laws. If you want to control some of the buildings go interventionists. If you want a super efficient economy, go to Laissez Fair but you wont be able to build. Etc
If your play style is to not build private buildings under laissez faire, you can just do that. I think most players prefer the way it is now. I’m not convinced that 100% pure laissez faire is something that has ever existed anyway.
 
  • 9
Reactions:
Can you expand on what you're getting at with the laws? What effects are you thinking of with relation to foreign investment?
From what I understand foreign investment is "opt-in" (unless you're a subject), and I was thinking that maybe some laws (like Laissez-Faire or Free Trade or a combination of both or something else), would make it so effectively anyone could invest in your country even without a diplo pact, or remove the influence cost to maintain the pact
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
I dont think it makes sense to have a bureaucracy cost state buildings surely thats covered in the operational cost of the building itself, and it sounds unbelievably annoying in the late to mid game when u are building atleast a building a week and ur going to have to sprinkle in government admins constantly which combined with the fact that up to 80% of the money u get from dividends can just magically disappear this may just death spiral u on the late game.

Also u should not have to go to war to nationalize assets the other nation should have to go to war to keep their assets.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Sad to see the Directly Controlled Investment go. I can see how it can't really be supported anymore, and expected this day to come when it became a game option, with so many things working differently to the default mod. Still I gotta say, it was a damn good mechanic. When I saw it mentioned in DevDiaries before release, I was overjoyed and saw it as squaring the circle of having private investment and also having the player make the choices. It encouraged working in the best interest of the pops, without ever dictating what you needed to do - and after the pretty bad building AI of Vic2's pops, that was great.

I just wanna say it was not a bad mechanic that needed a change. It was great, and deserves the praise and remembering, and to never be remembered as a bad step for the game.
Agreed. Player-led direction of building was a very good way of solving the problem of the bonehead capitalist AI that plagued Vicky II. The problem was that it arguably went too far in the other direction, and tended to turn managing any large, late-game nation into a micromanagement hell of constantly pausing to expand construction or que up more buildings (hence the "cookie clicker" insult often hurled at the game by diehard Vicky II fans). What they're planning now sounds like a much better compromise between the two extremes.
 
Well damn. This was the feature i waited the most for and then it comes with an end to direct Investment.

Not sure i can continue with the development of this or if i will stay in Version 1.6. I find the autonomous Investment pool to utterly ruin the core gameplay loop for me but damn these ideas sound nice conceptually.

Need to think on this.
 
  • 3
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I dont think it makes sense to have a bureaucracy cost state buildings surely thats covered in the operational cost of the building itself, and it sounds unbelievably annoying in the late to mid game when u are building atleast a building a week and ur going to have to sprinkle in government admins constantly which combined with the fact that up to 80% of the money u get from dividends can just magically disappear this may just death spiral u on the late game.

Also u should not have to go to war to nationalize assets the other nation should have to go to war to keep their assets.
Yeah this sounds like it Kills government tun economies dead.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
China literally does this lol. I’ve read that their government gives preferential treatment to the state-owned enterprises, which has allowed them to outcompete private alternatives. Think of it as more of a feature than a flaw.
But the Chinese government can do this because they're a totalitarian dictatorship that constantly meddles in the economy and the affairs of private businesses, in the game every government and economy type controls the PMs of their buildings.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Ideally, the colonies have a small privately-owned sector I'd say. But then they'd mainly build government owned buildings which do not require a financial district.
Maybe we could expand our laws to define what happens to these buildings in the future.

Auto-sell sounds like a neat idea, yes. Not coming with release, but I'm taking a note.
Re. auto-sell, I think the most intuitive option would be to have a checkbox on the construction menu for 'Privatise as soon as complete'.
 
  • 4
Reactions:
Yeah, we have actually investigated splitting PM ownership but it's really complex.
Maybe one day :crossed_fingers:
Yeah I spent some time thinking about this for you free of charge! ;)

But yeah its complex because in your current setup you'd have to splinter pops out into which building levels they work at instead of just which building which would essentially exponentially increase the amount of unique "buildings" you have pops working at. You could of course just throw in the towel and pay all pops working in a state an average wage of all the aggregated buildings but then how do you decide on hiring when evaluating profitability? Yeah its messy but there's gotta be a solution because automation should be controlled at the company level.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Is this affected by laws? How Homesteading and Collectivized Agriculture are distinguished from each other?

Homesteading doesn't prevent large land owner from existing, so you still have manor, who will invest in their own private venture, they just don't own all the land, so their number are more limited.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
thanks for this very well-written dev diary! excited for these changes - i'm generally in favor of putting things tangibly 'on the map' in this game (even if it punishes my cpu a bit), ownership always seemed too abstracted given its thematic and mechanical importance. V3 is growing into something quite special, love to see it :)
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Why do you need to go to war to forcibly nationalise foreign owned buildings? Shouldn't it be the other way around? You can do it but there's a high chance the other country will declare war on you and potentially take even more from you? I mean, what magical force field is there preventing a government from just seizing those buildings if they really want to?
 
  • 1
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
@PDX_H4n1baL Please allow Foreign Investment in states (not the whole country, just the state itself) where we have a treaty port. Double thank you if you make that a vanilla feature like Foreign Investment in Subjects.
 
  • 4Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Yeah, possibly.
One thing we wanted to avoid is that people don't get confused with the state that the building is located in. There's no ownership by Normandy, Picardy and Burgundy, only French is what we wanted to make clear.If you want to call it state-owned you're welcome to do so and we will understand.
That makes sense. In that case, government-owned or publicly-owned might be better. Those terms are used more often than country-owned, which as far as I know is not a term other than in Victoria III.

The reason being that country can refer to a part of a nation, just as Normandy is part of France. For example, England has the West Country, Australia has Kelly Country, the USA has Indian Country, and many nations have their Coal Country. So it's odd to think of a building as owned by the "West Country of England"

Edit. FWIW in Australia we have a national government, state governments and state-owned enterprises, but it's usually clear from context whether the enterprise is owned by the State Government or the National Government. Where the term might be confusing, people use government-owned company or government-owned corporation instead.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
How does my country get its first capitalists, if the economy starts entirely agrarian and artisanal?

Profitable artisan invest in their own enterprise so some probably become capitalist at some point, if law and production method permit it (for example handcrafted luxury furniture probably doesn't generate a whole lot of capitalist even if it can be highly profitable).

Then there is the financial sector generated by trade, which should generate most of your early capitalist once you switch away from mercantilism or closed, if your industry still mostly artisan owned.

Then there is the state privatization, which could allow artisan and small landowner to generate financial sector and manor, from what I understand, as the investment pool top priority use is known to be profitable privatization and privatized enterprise always become capitalist or aristocrat owned, from what been currently mentioned.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions: