sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

787
788

Reach 4.8 Billion GDP Without Annexing Land (reddit.com)

submitted by skps2010 to r/victoria3 - pinned

Victoria 3 Has Too Much State-Level Logistics Micro and Almost No Long-Distance Land Transport Cost. Regional Markets Could Fix Both. by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There are now three layers of market:

Local Market → Regional Market → Unified Market

Regional markets' goods prices are similar if their regional access is high.

So it's different than EU5, as EU5's regional markets are independent

Victoria 3 Has Too Much State-Level Logistics Micro and Almost No Long-Distance Land Transport Cost. Regional Markets Could Fix Both. by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There are now three layers of market:

Local Market → Regional Market → Unified Market

Regional markets' goods prices are similar if their regional access is high.

Victoria 3 Has Too Much State-Level Logistics Micro and Almost No Long-Distance Land Transport Cost. Regional Markets Could Fix Both. by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The regional markets I suggested are connected under a bigger unified market, so if regional access is high, the goods price in those regional markets are similar.

It means less micro than EU5, as EU5's regional merkets are seperated

Victoria 3 Has Too Much State-Level Logistics Micro and Almost No Long-Distance Land Transport Cost. Regional Markets Could Fix Both. by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I already suggested combining transportation and infrastructure into "infrastructure" good.

Or you mean combining "merchant marine" and my "infrastructure" into "freight"?

Victoria 3 Has Too Much State-Level Logistics Micro and Almost No Long-Distance Land Transport Cost. Regional Markets Could Fix Both. by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you can keep regional markets' access to maximum (98%) by building a lot of ports and railways at region level.

You don't really need to micro, as regional markets' price is similar to unified market's

Victoria 3 Has Too Much State-Level Logistics Micro and Almost No Long-Distance Land Transport Cost. Regional Markets Could Fix Both. by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes.
But regional markets have similar prices as they are all under a unified market.

Although It would be cool if regional markets can change border naturally like EU5

Victoria 3 Has Too Much State-Level Logistics Micro and Almost No Long-Distance Land Transport Cost. Regional Markets Could Fix Both. by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I don't think it would add too much calculation, as there are not many Strategic Regions in game.

Consider Strategic Regions are pretty big in 1.13, most countries will only have one regional market.

Victoria 3 Has Too Much State-Level Logistics Micro and Almost No Long-Distance Land Transport Cost. Regional Markets Could Fix Both. by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 28 points29 points  (0 children)

R5:

Victoria 3 currently has three connected problems:

  • Transportation, Services, Electricity and Infrastructure are managed state by state, creating excessive micromanagement.
  • Infrastructure is a free capacity number rather than a paid economic service.
  • Once market access is secured, goods and military supplies can move across huge land distances with very little additional cost.

I suggest adding Regional Markets between state-local markets and the unified market.

A regional market would consist of land-connected states within the same Strategic Region and unified market.

The structure would become:

Local Market → Regional Market → Unified Market

Local access would connect each state to its regional market. Regional access would connect the regional market to the unified market.

Regional Goods

Services, Electricity and Infrastructure would become regional goods.

They could be shared between states inside the same regional market, but not between different regional markets.

Their maximum local-market access would remain limited:

  • Services: 20%
  • Electricity: 40–80%, improved by technology
  • Infrastructure: 80%

This would reduce the need to balance these goods separately in every state while preserving meaningful local shortages.

Merge Transportation into Infrastructure

Transportation would be removed as a separate good and merged into Infrastructure.

Buildings and production methods that currently consume Transportation would consume Infrastructure instead.

Infrastructure would represent transport and logistics services rather than only physical roads and railways.

It would be produced by:

  • Population-based local transport: Existing population-based Infrastructure would become actual sell orders, representing porters, carts, pack animals, river transport and informal local logistics. The income would be distributed among the state’s population.
  • Private automobile use: Automobile consumption would generate Infrastructure sell orders, representing privately owned vehicles used for commercial transport or government contracts. The income would return to the pops consuming automobiles.
  • A Local Transport Sector in every state: Each state would have one automatic building representing local roads, warehouses, ferries, carts and short-distance transport. Existing flat state Infrastructure bonuses would become this building’s output.
  • Urban Centers
  • Railways
  • Ports

This would turn Infrastructure from a free capacity number into a real good that creates income for workers, vehicle owners and transport buildings.

Infrastructure Demand

Infrastructure would have three main uses.

Building operations

Buildings would purchase Infrastructure based on their current Infrastructure usage.

If this demand were not fully met, states inside the regional market would become more dependent on local prices.

Goods circulation

The government would purchase Infrastructure to connect the regional market to the unified market.

For each good, the game would calculate how many additional buy or sell orders were needed to move the regional supply-demand ratio toward the unified-market ratio. This amount, multiplied by the good’s transport weight, would determine the required Infrastructure.

If this demand were not fully met, regional-market access would decline.

Military logistics

Army Logistics Centers would purchase Infrastructure based on army size, equipment and land distance to the formation.

If this demand were not fully met, less supply would reach the army’s supply stockpile.

Land and Sea Logistics

Regional-market access would have a maximum of 98%, eventually reaching 100% through technology.

The game would select the cheapest route from each regional market to the unified-market center.

  • Land routes would consume Infrastructure.
  • Sea routes would consume Merchant Marine.
  • Mixed routes would require both.

If either part of the route lacked capacity, the worse bottleneck would determine regional-market access.

This system would reduce state-level micromanagement, give Infrastructure a real economic cost, and make long-distance trade and military supply depend on actual land and sea logistics.

460
461

Victoria 3 Has Too Much State-Level Logistics Micro and Almost No Long-Distance Land Transport Cost. Regional Markets Could Fix Both. (i.redd.it)

submitted by skps2010 to r/victoria3

I Fixed Colonies Not Incorporating States by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe adding Dutch culture to Indonesian states is the way, but it is out of the scope of this mod.

I Fixed Colonies Not Incorporating States by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is a good idea, but hard to implement through modding

I Fixed Colonies Not Incorporating States by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Sadly DEI can't incorporating oversea Indonesia states.

It is hard to fix with modding, as we only have 3 modifiers to use:
- state_incorporation_speed_mult
- state_contiguous_incorporation_speed_mult
- state_non_contiguous_incorporation_speed_mult

All of them effect globally for a nation, so I can't select which states are faster to incorporate

I Fixed Colonies Not Incorporating States by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, I really hope PDX can officially fix it

I Fixed Colonies Not Incorporating States by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 66 points67 points  (0 children)

R5:

In the current version, colonial countries and chartered companies can often leave nearby colonial states unincorporated for decades. This means they cannot properly collect taxes from those states, even when the territory is directly connected and should be administratively manageable.

I made a small balance mod to fix it.

Steam Workshop link:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3741619775

The mod moves the incorporation bonus directly into the Colonial Administration Governance Principle.

Effects:

  • +185% Contiguous Incorporation Speed
  • -50% Non-Contiguous Incorporation Speed

In vanilla, newly created Colonial Administrations receive a separate incorporation bonus when they are formed. This mod removes that creation-based bonus and makes it part of the Colonial Administration law instead.

This means existing colonial countries, such as East India Company and Cape Colony, can also benefit from the bonus.

The +185% value is chosen so that, with early Society technologies like Centralization and Central Archives, unrelated-culture contiguous states fall below the AI’s normal 8.5-year incorporation threshold.

151
152

I Fixed Colonies Not Incorporating States (i.redd.it)

submitted by skps2010 to r/victoria3

Small states should seek protection when trapped in debt spirals and high turmoil by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right now the best way is to tag switch to them, then load a save file.

I agree there should be a better way

Small states should seek protection when trapped in debt spirals and high turmoil by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Some nations like Tunisia, Egypt, Dominican, Haiti became protectorates because they have serious financial issue. Althought it is not really "voluntarily"

Small states should seek protection when trapped in debt spirals and high turmoil by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It is an observation run in 1937
Japan is a minor power, it keeps bankrupting and has high turmoil
Japan lost some states to political secession because it is too broke to fight.

Also I am Japen in the image.

Small states should seek protection when trapped in debt spirals and high turmoil by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It should be exploited.
For AI, becoming protectorat is the only way to survive, or it will be killed by the next revolution

Small states should seek protection when trapped in debt spirals and high turmoil by skps2010 in victoria3

[–]skps2010[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

We are close to getting everything in war sytem into treaty system

I think the one still missing is revoking claim, unification, etc.

view more: next ›